The Queen is officially the longest-reigning living monarch in the world, following the death of Rama IX of Thailand, who died in October after 70 years on the throne.
But after nearly 65 years as the UK's head of state, is it time for her to abdicate and allow her son, the Prince of Wales, to become king?
Prince Charles, who turned 67 last November, has been first in line to the throne since February 1952 and would be the oldest heir to accede to the British throne.
Can the Queen step down?
Constitutionally, there is nothing to prevent Queen Elizabeth, who became the UK's longest-reigning monarch last September, from stepping down. Her uncle, Edward VIII, famously abdicated in 1936 in order to marry US divorcee Wallis Simpson, upon which her father became King George VI.
If she were to relinquish her position, the Queen would follow Juan Carlos of Spain, who abdicated in June 2014, as well as the last three queens of the Netherlands, who all stepped aside in their seventies.
However, those close to the monarch say she would never consider giving up her crown. "She's not staying on because of any concern about [Charles's] abilities as a king," says Sarah Bradford, the author of Queen Elizabeth II: Her Life in Our Times. "The Queen simply feels she must do her duty and she's never even contemplated abdication."
What does the public think?
When Charles turned 65, there was an open acknowledgement he would gradually take on more of his mother's duties as a kind of "unofficial co-regency", carrying out 527 official engagements in 2015.
Despite stepping up his workload, however, surveys have consistently suggested the public is not keen on the idea of him as king or his wife, the Duchess of Cornwall, as queen – a title 55 per cent of people are against, according to a ComRes poll in April 2015. The insider consensus is that Camilla will be styled "princess consort".
As the graphic above shows, support for the Queen abdicating peaked in 1990, when almost half of the country were keen to see her pass on the reins of power.
However, enthusiasm for "King Charles" plummeted soon afterwards, probably due to the public breakdown of Charles's marriage to Diana, Princess of Wales in 1992, amid allegations of infidelity.
It wasn't until the end of the 1990s that the Prince's reputation began to pull out of its nosedive. The modest climb can be traced to the 1997 appointment of PR advisor Mark Bolland, who is widely credited with restoring Charles's image and preparing the public for his second marriage.
Despite Bolland's best efforts, however, public acceptance of the Queen's abdication in favour of her eldest son has never again approached its 1990 peak. The most recent survey shows 70 per cent of the public would prefer her to remain, while only one in five think she should abdicate ("don't know" responses were not counted).
Would 'King Charles' be bad for the monarchy?
The problem with Charles as monarch, says the Daily Mail's Allison Pearson, is that "we know far too much about his foibles and past errors to revere him as we revere his mother". Who on earth can follow such an act, she asks.
In addition, the Prince's well-documented interventions in politics, including the black spider memos sent to government ministers, cast doubts about his ability to remain neutral.
Constitutional monarchy "can't possibly work if the monarch holds and expresses strong views of his own", self-declared royalist Geoffrey Wheatcroft writes in The Spectator.
The Prince of Wales "possesses a strong sense of duty", he says, asking: "Might not it be best expressed by renouncing the throne in advance?"
The Guardian's Polly Toynbee advocates a more extreme solution - abolishing the monarchy altogether. "Let [Queen Elizabeth II] reign as long as she lives," she writes. "But let her be Elizabeth the Last."
Graham Smith, a spokesman for Republic, which campaigns for an elected head of state, believes an "activist" King Charles would be "intolerable" for democracy.
"Charles is a very good advert for why the monarchy is a bad idea. The monarch has power, access and influence, and is completely beyond the reach of democratic accountability," he says.
Infographic by statista.com for TheWeek.co.uk
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar